Remote-controllable devices and systems are increasingly installed in properties and homes. The purpose of the systems is to secure and/or maintain such conditions in properties, that living in them is both safe and pleasant. The spectrum of remote-controlled on remote-monitored devices is wide. The same property may have devices from several suppliers. These devices can often not communicate directly with one another. It is also common that each system has its operation logic, the remote controlling of which requires the use of a particular data communications solution.
Building service suppliers have lately started to solve the problem very generally by ordering from an operator for the customer target its own, separately costing additional connection, which contains certain target-specific agreed-on features and must be separately maintained, either via a telephone network or a broadband network, which broadband network can be a permanent of wireless 2G/3G network broadband connection. Most suppliers have found this to be the easiest mode of operation for them at the moment, even though it contains several problem points.
If a new additional connection is provided for the target, data communications matters must often be agreed upon separately with an administrator of the local intranet. The intranet administrator probably has to make additional network configurations for the connection, so that establishing a remote connection can succeed.
Often one must wait for an additional connection, especially a permanent network connection, for a long time, even many weeks. When the connection is finally received, it often does not work in the way agreed upon when ordering it from the operator, and one must negotiate about repair procedures and wait for the operator to act in the matter.
Operators still promise too much, when talking about the operation of wireless broadband connections. When the remote target is connected to the new wireless connection and it does not work correctly, prolonged and time-consuming, costly and on all parts draining negotiations are mostly ahead.
Additionally operators strive to commit customers to being connection users by lumping together the connection, a modem and for example a 24-month mandatory use time. Not all users however are willing to participate in this, but often want to “hold the reigns themselves”.
There are always additional costs for starting up and using a new connection opened for remote use. Many private households or housing cooperatives are not prepared to pay additional costs.
On the other hand, if additional services, such as a permanent IP address or a dynamic domain name service, which enable remote use, are procured from the serving operator or the network connection provider on top of the already existing connection, the following kinds of problems may for example appear.
A permanent IP address is not obtained, whereby a dynamic domain name service must be used. If the remote use device supplier does not provide dynamic domain name service, it must be procured from the market. Dynamic domain name service is provided also by some free parties (for example maintained by some student parties), such as dyndns.org, dy.fi etc. The integration of these domain name services is varying and availability and reacting to operation problems generally insufficient for implementing reliable remote control of a property.
Nowadays connection establishment to broadband connections occurring from outside is often restricted so that remote use at a target does not work. Operators may for example completely prevent the opening of a connection occurring from the Internet to the connection. Thus joining a dynamic domain name service is not useful.
The operation of the dynamic domain name service also requires that the target obtains a public Internet address from the connection it uses. In order for this to be possible, the connection feature must support the operation of several public addresses.
One alternative for getting the target into operational state is that a network specialist programs the connection to be suitable for remote use on-site at the target.
Thus care must be taken that the operation of the other network devices and Internet connections of the connection is not prevented or disturbed. Additionally the original connection of the target often turns out to be unsuitable for remote use in its present form. Thus modems or connection type must be changed or alteration work must be negotiated with the operator.
Target-specifically customised solutions always incur additional costs for the service buyer. It is also an inefficient manner of operating for the service supplier.
One can try to solve remote use of the target also with an application-specific solution. Thus the device supplier can buy from the operator its own radio network and form in it a private access point name (APN), which determines data communications settings in GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) and HSDPA (High-Speed Downlink Packet Access)/HSUPA (High-Speed Uplink Packet Access) networks. By using APN settings, and Internet connection is provided via a wireless 2G/3G/4G network to the devices in the target. In such cases the user must pay separately for the connection and for the interface modems and programs enabling its remote use. Often such an additional connection cannot or may not be used for more than one use purpose, for example for the remote use of devices supplied by the building service supplier. Additionally operators nowadays generally limit the maximum amount of data transfer in such connections, which when exceeded may cause large additional invoices for the connection owner.
In housing cooperative type targets, which have several properties, the properties may be connected to “remote use” occurring only within the intranet formed between the properties. No “real” remote contact is obtained for such targets, if the remote contact user is physically elsewhere than in one of the properties in question in the intranet.
Routing information between any two arbitrary apparatuses can be stored on server. When an apparatus requests from the server route information of some other apparatus the server can send the required routing information to the apparatus that made the route information request or to both apparatuses.
US 2010/0014529 depicts a network communication apparatus which allows connection between two arbitrary network communication apparatuses in a network that discloses plural NAT routers. First the network communication apparatus automatically judges whether or not a direct local connection is possible to another arbitrary apparatus. The depicted network communication apparatus includes: a direct search unit which transmits a direct search request to another arbitrary network communication apparatus, a route information obtaining unit which obtains route information of the other arbitrary network communication apparatus from a server, and a communication control unit which performs, when the information regarding the other network communication apparatus is obtained upon the direct search request, communication with the other network communication apparatus based on the information, and which performs, when the information is not obtained, communication with the other network communication apparatus, based on the route information that has been received from the server.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,590,074 discloses a communication system where, when a network element at a VPN site needs routing information to communicate with another arbitrary VPN site, the network element will check if it has the required routing information. If not, it may obtain the route on-demand from the route server. Upon receipt of the route request message, the route server will cause routing information to be transmitted to the initiating VPN site, and optionally transmitted to the intended recipient VPN site to allow the VPN sites to update their routing tables and pass data directly to each other.